Originally published at: Aussie Pilot Facing Multiple Charges Walks Out of Courtroom - AVweb
Passenger did not survive 2021 beach crash landing.
What I want to know is how did this clown get to age 68? And without spending time in prison and or jail?
Didnât know the Aussieâs had 'em too. Everything described is entirely predictable - except Iâve never heard one say "Iâll bid you all a very good day.â
Now thatâs newsworthy!
Sounds like some of the members on this forumâŚ
Sounds like Aussy aviation authorities are as heavy handed as they are on this continent.
It was an experimental aircraft and I assume like us there was a promintly displayed disclaimer indicating the aircraft was not certified and built to govt specifications, (like boeing does it) so does that not cover him from being held liable. Assuming the 83 yr old passenger could read?
I read other comments and assume if you are not willing to put an actual identifiable name to your post you donât really believe what you are advocating??
I must admit, I have no understanding of the legalities of being a âsovereign citizenâ. I was raised to behave, mind my pâs and qâs, be seen and not heard, and do as Iâm told. I never knew there was an option to simply say, âIâm taking my ball and going homeâ.
Society is kind of foisted on us from day one and there isnât much opportunity in life to say âstop the world from spinning, I want to get offâ. It is interesting that some people choose to do exactly that. I wonder if the two old codgers in âSecond Hand Lionsâ were the inspiration here.
Speaking only about US law (and not Australian), it doesnât say what you think it does. âI warned you with a signâ only suffices for licensees, not invitees. Please search these terms along with âduty of careâ.
Nor should you. âSovereign citizenâ does not exist except in the minds of people who believe rules donât apply to them.
He was not a pilot. Just because he flew an airplane doesnât make him a pilot. A pilot is licensed.
I have no experience with how heavy handed your regulatory bodies and courts are but in this incident I have no problems with seeing the pilot liable.
The pilot didnât have a licence. The pilot was not approved to maintain the aircraft but had in fact been doing the maintenance for many years and did not follow appropriate procedures - eg the seat belts were installed in 1973 and should have been replaced in 1990 as per ADs (the passengerâs belt had failed in 2 places in the impact and this resulted in their death).
The aircraft whilst in the experimental category is required to be maintained to certain standards here, it can be the pilot that does that if they are the builder or hold appropriate qualifications (this pilot was not the builder and was not qualified) and our pilotâs are required to be licensed pilots.
He appears to believe rules and regulations in society do not apply to him and if his actions kill or injure people then he cannot be held to account by society.
Implying that the passenger is responsible for his own death because he didnât read the âexperimentalâ sticker and so the pilot should not therefore be liable is a long stretch for me.
If our regulatory body is heavy handed for requiring a basic set of standards to be in place is heavy handed, I personally have no problems with it.
my 2c
âI wasnât flying, I was traveling.â
1 Like